New Japanese helicopter destroyer - Largest ship since World War II

[payeng]

They'll always have the option of converting it if they want to. If and when Article 9 is repealed or modified to allow carriers, all they have to do is buy some F-35Bs since they already have the platform ready. They can even fit a ski-jump on it later if they want to. If the Russians can retro-fit a ski-jump on the Admiral Gorshkov, the Japanese can do that too on the Izumo.

Hanger facility seems inadequate.

http://www.jeffhead.com/worldwideair...22DDH-0011.jpg

more then an ASW destroyer it seems like to be designed for amphibious assault role.

[desertswo]

Hanger facility seems inadequate.

http://www.jeffhead.com/worldwideair...22DDH-0011.jpg

more then an ASW destroyer it seems like to be designed for amphibious assault role.

It's big enough.

[payeng]

It's big enough.

Sir my POV was from angle of converting her into a full fledged aircraft carrier.

[Dreadnought]

Have Japan build its own indigeonous attack helo's for the ship (and future ones like her) and after Constitutional mods arm the ship for defensive/offensive roles.

China has now voiced opposition at Japans military expansion. Sound familiar to a few years ago?

You can pretty much bet that NK wont be happy about these developments either.;)

[Dreadnought]

It's big enough.

Agreed, Japan may even develop the same capabilities the USN developed in order to tailor fit some of their aircraft to fit the hangars of their carrieras. Swing wing designs etc.

Refitting the ship with a thicker fire resistant surface could not be all that hard considering the construction only took four years. Can always improve the next ship.

[desertswo]

Agreed, Japan may even develop the same capabilities the USN developed in order to tailor fit some of their aircraft to fit the hangars of their carrieras. Swing wing designs etc.

Refitting the ship with a thicker fire resistant surface could not be all that hard considering the construction only took four years. Can always improve the next ship.

I think those who have never been to sea in a CV/CVN have a false sense of what the hangar deck is all about. Folks, it's not for storing aircraft long term, unless one is one of the fabled "hangar queens" that only manage to fly once on deployment . . . three days from port when the air wing flies off at the end. USN aircraft rarely are struck below. Short of engine change outs or something equally as large, all maintenance, repair, fueling, arming, staging, and just sitting around chocked and chained, is done topside. This means that the "shirts" charged with the care and feeding of the airplanes must pay particular attention to things like corrosion control due to salt spray, but there's a whole science devoted to that, and it's something the Japanese know well enough. I see no practical issue with them operating ten to 12, maybe a couple more, F-35Bs off that deck should they choose to do so.

[Officer of Engineers]

Then, Sir, what are the hangers for?

[Dreadnought]

I think those who have never been to sea in a CV/CVN have a false sense of what the hangar deck is all about. Folks, it's not for storing aircraft long term, unless one is one of the fabled "hangar queens" that only manage to fly once on deployment . . . three days from port when the air wing flies off at the end. USN aircraft rarely are struck below. Short of engine change outs or something equally as large, all maintenance, repair, fueling, arming, staging, and just sitting around chocked and chained, is done topside. This means that the "shirts" charged with the care and feeding of the airplanes must pay particular attention to things like corrosion control due to salt spray, but there's a whole science devoted to that, and it's something the Japanese know well enough. I see no practical issue with them operating ten to 12, maybe a couple more, F-35Bs off that deck should they choose to do so.

Yep agreed. Have seen the "hangar queen" or sometimes trainers aft of the island structure starboard side. Usually the trainers are a different color. When I was out on "Ike" they were black two seaters.

[Dreadnought]

Then, Sir, what are the hangers for?

OOE Sir, Calisthenics!

[desertswo]

Then, Sir, what are the hangers for?

Just what I said, major maintenance, like pulling an engine. You don't do that topside for a whole host of reasons, all having to do with space and the devices you need to do that. Believe me when I tell you that during my three years aboard Constellation, with an air wing of nearly 100 aircraft, one rarely saw more than five or six below decks at any one time. Let's do the math and interpolate what that means to an air wing of maybe 16 or 20 aircraft both fixed and rotary winged. I'll go with a high of ten out of 100, just for ease of number crunching: 1/10 X 20 = 2. Piece of cake.

Oh, I've been meaning to say this to everyone since joining. I do appreciate the honorifics, but my name is Mike. No "Sir" or "Captain" required or desired.

[Doktor]

Mike,

You might be a civvie now, but most of the members will call you Capt. Live with it. You think it is easy to the good Col?

Salute back and carry on, sir

[desertswo]

What if it was built with the capability to easily install a catapult? In other words the structural items are there, just not the moving parts.

Doable, but you have to start thinking about what you lose by doing all of that. It's not just the CAT, it's the arresting gear too. All of that would be more topside weight than just the ski jump, with or without the angle. Also, as I previously mentioned, there is the power consideration. I have an idea what EMALS might consume based on watching the development of both USS Gerald R. Ford and HMS Queen Elizabeth these past four years, but I have no idea how many KWA Izumo can generate. My sense is though that it is not enough. Why do I say that? Because she's COGAG; in other words, essentially the same propulsion plant as an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer. Ford and QE will feature new designs in electrical generation, both nuclear and conventional, with QE being electric drive (I honestly don't know if Ford is going to be electric drive . . . which would make too much sense . . . or the traditional HP-LP geared turbine combination, but either way, the new zonal distribution system will produce three times the amount of KWA as the Nimitz), that are true Revolutions in Military Affairs (RMA). i don't sense that in Izumo, but I guess we shall see what we shall see.

[desertswo]

Mike,

You might be a civvie now, but most of the members will call you Capt. Live with it. You think it is easy to the good Col?

Salute back and carry on, sir

Aye aye Sir!

[Defcon5]

It is one refit away from a Ski Jump and a contract away from F-35B (which doesnt require ski jump, but it would optimal) or /MiG 29K(lol).

[Dreadnought]

One of several probable reasons for a Constitional amendment:

(Reuters) - Four Chinese ships spent more than 24 hours in what Japan sees as its territorial waters, prompting a Japanese protest to China on Thursday at a time when Tokyo has been signaling its desire for a summit.

Relations between the world's second- and third-largest economies have been strained for months, largely because of a dispute over a group of islands in the East China Sea.

But Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is keen to improve relations and has called for dialogue with China, although he has rejected any conditions on talks.

Chinese ships have previously been in waters near the uninhabited East China Sea islands that are controlled by Japan but claimed by both countries, but they have usually left after several hours.

"This is extremely regrettable and totally unacceptable," Japan's chief cabinet secretary, Yoshihide Suga, told a news conference.

He said Japan had summoned an envoy from the Chinese embassy early on Thursday to protest "strongly" and demand the ships immediately leave.

The ships withdrew at around noon, Japan's coastguard said.

It was the longest stay by Chinese ships in waters near the islands since the dispute flared anew last September, after Japan bought several of the islands from a private owner, angering China.

China's Foreign Ministry said the Chinese vessels had taken action against a Japanese boat that had entered Chinese territorial waters. It said it had lodged a complaint with Tokyo.

China's State Oceanic Administration said in a statement posted on its website on Wednesday that four coastguard ships were conducting a patrol around the islands.

The ships had spotted Japanese ships "infringing China's sovereignty" and told them to leave, the Chinese agency said.

For months, aircraft and ships from both countries have played a cat-and-mouse game near the islands, known as the Senkaku in Japan and the Diaoyu in China, ratcheting up tension.

According to an annual poll sponsored by the official China Daily and the Japanese think-tank Genron NPO, 92.8 percent of Chinese surveyed had a negative attitude towards Japan, 28 percentage points higher than in 2012 and the worst since 2005.

The survey, released this week, also showed that 90.1 percent of Japanese had negative feelings toward China, up from 84.3 percent last year. Both groups gave the island issue as the reason.

(Reporting by Elaine Lies; Additional reporting by Ben Blanchard and David Stanway in BEIJING; Editing by Nick Macfie)